Jump to content


Type 5 Heavy review - why this tank is extremely bad for the game, very poorly balanced and Edited i...

chi_ri_is_kinda_thicc_isnt_it type 5 gojira game balance

  • Please log in to reply
130 replies to this topic

Ph3lan #121 Posted 27 September 2017 - 01:35 PM

    Senior Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 18216 battles
  • 580
  • Member since:
    11-17-2010

View Posttajj7, on 26 September 2017 - 12:41 PM, said:

Phelan it would be good to see some answers on the EU super testers and the sandbox. 

 

Surely whatever issues with the supertesters were, the majority of those people probably still don't play and those that do probably didn't do anything. The WOWS has EU and NA super tester programmes, why can't tanks have that? 

 

And why is the Sandbox not being used for more general balancing testing, it is clear even if the developers balancing things are struggling to get it right that the current batch of super testers are not doing their jobs properly and the public test is a terrible environment to test in. 

 

The infrastructure is there already, other big games like Battlefield one have a CTE servers running constantly for trying out changes and the sandbox clearly showed some good work balancing the lights and arty (even though the lights were then butchered on common test). 

 

View PostBaldrickk, on 26 September 2017 - 01:48 PM, said:

You can always add a "this is my personal opinion" disclaimer 

 

Advertising Q/A streams better is needed.  It would also be good to get players involved in a question refinement beforehand. 

In the last Q/A there was no visibility of what questions were asked

Probably because in the previous one, exactly NONE of the tough questions were even asked, yet alone answered. 

Instead the questions that were picked were rewritten (or just written)  seemingly just so they could do a fluff piece that, if you just took the "answers" was indistinguishable from their other "coming soon" articles.  The 'community involvement' was basically a sham, and didn't address any of the communities concerns.

 

I can do a disclaimer, but it won't really matter for most people :) I am a player and and also the community manager, but I can't have my cake and eat it too :) I can't be just a player with one reply and than be the CM in the next one, it will confuse people.

As far as the Q&A streams is concerned. We are planning a lot of improvements in this regard and you will see them in action in the following months. You can check out this (WoWS) stream to see an already improved format here In this case we took questions in real time from FB/Twitch chat as well as from a forum thread pointing out who asked the questions and on which platform in the stream. One of our colleagues was gathering the questions behind the scenes. 

 

View PostWunderWurst, on 27 September 2017 - 01:04 AM, said:

Before I want to comment on that I would like to make a formal request:

As some people mentioned in here before EU does not have any supertesters (any more). I would like to request the opportunity for EU to get back into the super tester business.

 

I can see that there a multiple comments about EU supertesters. I don't have any info about it, but I'll poke around and see if I can find out. 

 

View PostAikl, on 27 September 2017 - 10:44 AM, said:

 

I appreciate your story, and feel it's time for going into analogy story-telling time:

A lot of hostility towards WG probably stems from what essentially is the same as an electrician or painter agreeing to plans, saying it will be done soonTM, and then locking off the room so the customer has no idea what he's actually doing or how much progress he's made.
When the work is finished, the electrician/painter stops answering calls and goes on to the next room. Maybe he plans to fix it in, hm, four months? Long time to wait when the lights flicker or a wall is the wrong color. Four-five months later, he comes back to fix it - but the lights now shine too bright and the painter picked the right colour, but in the wrong shade. It stays like that for over a year....

 

I see that a lot of people interpreted the story in a lot of different ways :) My goal with the story was not as far reaching though, I simply wanted to point out that it is very simple to commit the fallacy of thinking that we could do it better if it was us in the same position without being fully aware of all the circumstances. It was not intended as a metaphor for the development or balancing process. 



ZlatanArKung #122 Posted 27 September 2017 - 02:01 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostPh3lan, on 27 September 2017 - 01:35 PM, said:

 

 

I can do a disclaimer, but it won't really matter for most people :) I am a player and and also the community manager, but I can't have my cake and eat it too :) I can't be just a player with one reply and than be the CM in the next one, it will confuse people.

As far as the Q&A streams is concerned. We are planning a lot of improvements in this regard and you will see them in action in the following months. You can check out this (WoWS) stream to see an already improved format here In this case we took questions in real time from FB/Twitch chat as well as from a forum thread pointing out who asked the questions and on which platform in the stream. One of our colleagues was gathering the questions behind the scenes. 

 

 

I can see that there a multiple comments about EU supertesters. I don't have any info about it, but I'll poke around and see if I can find out. 

 

 

I see that a lot of people interpreted the story in a lot of different ways :) My goal with the story was not as far reaching though, I simply wanted to point out that it is very simple to commit the fallacy of thinking that we could do it better if it was us in the same position without being fully aware of all the circumstances. It was not intended as a metaphor for the development or balancing process. 

 

The only lying circumstance needed to release Defender would be if you were forced to make a lot of money in a short time.

 

It was obviously OP before release.

 

And if there is a non-financial circumstance for release of Defender, please write it down. 

Because everyone with some small knowledge about this game knew it was going to be OP (hopefully including your own Development Department). 

 

Your balance department have failed to balance quite a few tanks last year (Defender, Type 5, Type 4, Maus, Chrysler, Liberte, Obj 907, VK 100.01 P, T10 light ranks, Type 64, Type 62, AMX 13 75 for example).

With a general trend to remove weakspots and increase armour and lowering some regular ammo Penetration. 

There has been a considerable shift in what the development department to has put out since Murazor became head of it, to deny it is lying.

The only good thing coming out of Development department for last year or so is the arty remake.



CaptainThunderWalker #123 Posted 27 September 2017 - 03:03 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18937 battles
  • 1,297
  • Member since:
    09-25-2015

View PostPh3lan, on 27 September 2017 - 01:35 PM, said:

I see that a lot of people interpreted the story in a lot of different ways :) My goal with the story was not as far reaching though, I simply wanted to point out that it is very simple to commit the fallacy of thinking that we could do it better if it was us in the same position without being fully aware of all the circumstances. It was not intended as a metaphor for the development or balancing process. 

 

The problem is that some of the tanks are so completely overpowered that even my cat can tell something doesn't smell right.

 

Let's put it simple and take the Defenderand compare it to the IS-3.

The Defender is pretty much outclassing the IS-3 in all aspects. It's like saying 6 is equal to 5 when it clearly isn't.

 

Generally you are right to point to that fallacy, but not when the errors made are obvious enough that the entire forum burst into outrage before the tank was even released.

 

The Defender is the most obvious example, but there are a lot of them introduced in the last year, and to me it's looking more and more like a cash grab. And if it is not, much like Zlatan above, I want to see the true reason.


Edited by CaptainThunderWalker, 27 September 2017 - 03:04 PM.


Aikl #124 Posted 27 September 2017 - 04:21 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25142 battles
  • 4,174
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostPh3lan, on 27 September 2017 - 12:35 PM, said:

(...)

I see that a lot of people interpreted the story in a lot of different ways :) My goal with the story was not as far reaching though, I simply wanted to point out that it is very simple to commit the fallacy of thinking that we could do it better if it was us in the same position without being fully aware of all the circumstances. It was not intended as a metaphor for the development or balancing process. 

 

The goal with my story was to get a point across on how players perceive Wargaming. It was not meant to interpret yours; which frankly had a clear meaning.

 

Just like most players understand that the craftsmen/developers have difficult work, they also except some feedback from them. Your story just happened to be a very handy way of, once again, reminding the staff/WG that being perceived as incompetent is not doing them any favours.

 

I did read that developers are afraid of saying anything (lest they get accused of lying),hence why they could very well concentrate on commenting on single issues than writing a blog. Good to see that a Q&A program is in the works anyway. :)

 

Most of the player-staff interaction is best described with the Norwegian phrase Goddag Mann? Økseskaft!!. 



Cobra6 #125 Posted 27 September 2017 - 05:12 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16296 battles
  • 15,113
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostPh3lan, on 27 September 2017 - 12:35 PM, said:

I can see that there a multiple comments about EU supertesters. I don't have any info about it, but I'll poke around and see if I can find out.

 

Thanks! I'd love for that program to be reinstated and participate again, anything that helps improve this game and turn it towards the "better".

 

Cobra 6



Baldrickk #126 Posted 27 September 2017 - 06:32 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29200 battles
  • 13,104
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostPh3lan, on 27 September 2017 - 01:35 PM, said:

I can do a disclaimer, but it won't really matter for most people :) I am a player and and also the community manager, but I can't have my cake and eat it too :) I can't be just a player with one reply and than be the CM in the next one, it will confuse people.

As far as the Q&A streams is concerned. We are planning a lot of improvements in this regard and you will see them in action in the following months. You can check out this (WoWS) stream to see an already improved format here In this case we took questions in real time from FB/Twitch chat as well as from a forum thread pointing out who asked the questions and on which platform in the stream. One of our colleagues was gathering the questions behind the scenes. 

Some good stuff there.

 

Maybe you should get a personal account only for your personal views on the game, free from any direct link to WG?

 

Those "In the know" would know it was you, but it would be a lot harder for anyone to think it was an official statement. 



Jumping_Turtle #127 Posted 28 September 2017 - 11:07 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 59143 battles
  • 5,123
  • [CNUT] CNUT
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

View PostCobra6, on 26 September 2017 - 10:24 AM, said:

 

Why is it undermining the argument if a player who is very invested in a game (and generally competent players are more invested) and understands mechanics/balances better? There is a very high chance these players will want this game to exist as long as possible and be as balanced as possible because they greatly enjoy it and thus will be able to give viable information on tanks/balance issues.

 

Don't you think there will always be a little bias when players get a say what they want. I guess all good to best players would love to see arty go.

and by reading some topics and posts here, a lot of the best players are way off thinking what the lower players see and feel about the game. They have no clue sometimes. It might be better for that 0,01% of the better players but will the outcome also please the overal majority ?



maroar #128 Posted 29 September 2017 - 01:43 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29477 battles
  • 2,462
  • [G__G] G__G
  • Member since:
    10-02-2012

View PostJumping_Turtle, on 28 September 2017 - 11:07 PM, said:

 

Don't you think there will always be a little bias when players get a say what they want. I guess all good to best players would love to see arty go.

and by reading some topics and posts here, a lot of the best players are way off thinking what the lower players see and feel about the game. They have no clue sometimes. It might be better for that 0,01% of the better players but will the outcome also please the overal majority ?

 

So, catering to the overall majority so far is a good thing?
Type 5 Heavy, Type 4 Heavy, Maus, IS7. Those were some desperately needed buffs... (Especially the IS-7, which did not need it at all, and not the IS-4, which is actually useless as an armoured vehicle, which these other HTs definitely were not, or damaging vehicle).

The nerfing of the T10 lights, so now they are worse than the previous T8s.

The introduction of the Skorpion (which is a bit like the old hellcat), Defender, Patriot.

 

It would seem to me like some people don't see how things should be balanced, if so far that has been done to cater to the majority, then it has failed to bring balance and it has failed to please them as well as that minority.

 

Also I would like to see WG cater to the below 50% winrate players, since that is jsut as big a group as the above 50% winrate players and since it seems that these top players have to be excluded as far as catering to players go, the percentage of these below 50% winrate players will then be even greater than the above 50% winrate players, we need more unpenetrable tanks and more HE/HESH derp guns!!!

 



Jumping_Turtle #129 Posted 29 September 2017 - 02:14 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 59143 battles
  • 5,123
  • [CNUT] CNUT
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

View Postmaroar, on 29 September 2017 - 01:43 PM, said:

 

So, catering to the overall majority so far is a good thing?
 

 

No catering anyone isnt good. Not the baddies, nor the good guys.

 

example. I was watching the Sirfoch stream a while ago when he was preparing for that CC 3 players tournament. He was joined by Orzanel a few moments later to practise a bit since they had no clue what was happening on tier 6. And the numbers of nonsense I heard them talking about tier 6 was laughable. Just because they never play lower tiers. we can probably agree both are pretty good players, but they don't always got it right concerning this game.

 

and some proposals by the better to best players I just do not agree with. They play on such a different level, that the things they want or see good for the game perhaps isnt at all. It's good for them no doubt about that. But that is the risk with only taking advice from the best players.



HundeWurst #130 Posted 29 September 2017 - 02:29 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 67715 battles
  • 4,235
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

View PostJumping_Turtle, on 29 September 2017 - 02:14 PM, said:

 

No catering anyone isnt good. Not the baddies, nor the good guys.

 

example. I was watching the Sirfoch stream a while ago when he was preparing for that CC 3 players tournament. He was joined by Orzanel a few moments later to practise a bit since they had no clue what was happening on tier 6. And the numbers of nonsense I heard them talking about tier 6 was laughable. Just because they never play lower tiers. we can probably agree both are pretty good players, but they don't always got it right concerning this game.

 

and some proposals by the better to best players I just do not agree with. They play on such a different level, that the things they want or see good for the game perhaps isnt at all. It's good for them no doubt about that. But that is the risk with only taking advice from the best players.

 

Even though they might hardly ever play tier 6 I highly doubt that they only talked nonsense.

Jumping_Turtle #131 Posted 29 September 2017 - 03:52 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 59143 battles
  • 5,123
  • [CNUT] CNUT
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

View PostWunderWurst, on 29 September 2017 - 02:29 PM, said:

 

Even though they might hardly ever play tier 6 I highly doubt that they only talked nonsense.

 

not only of course.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users